WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2947/98 by Antonio TAJANI to the Commission. The privatisation of Società Autostrade S.p.A. in Italy
Date: 1998-10-08
Institutions: European Parliament, TAJANI
Subjects: Italy, equal treatment, motorway, privatisation, works contract













EUR-Lex - 91998E2947 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91998E2947

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2947/98 by Antonio TAJANI to the Commission. The privatisation of Società Autostrade S.p.A. in Italy  


Official Journal C 135 , 14/05/1999 P. 0143 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-2947/98by Antonio Tajani (PPE) to the Commission(8 October 1998)Subject: The privatisation of Società Autostrade S.p.A. in ItalyOn 30 July 1998 the Commission stated its position on the privatisation of Società Autostrade S.p.A. and laid down a number of rules with which the Italian authorities must comply in order to adhere to the principle of equal treatment and non-discrimination with regard to both the sale of shares and the arrangements for application of the concession, in compliance with the European rules set out in the Commission communication(1).Would the Commission state whether:1. given the fact that it itself confirmed the nature of the relationship with Società Autostrade as being based on a "works concession", the management of works contracts by an "external, independent commission" appointed by the Ministry for Public Works is in keeping with the provisions of Directives 305 of 26 July 1971(2) and 440 of 18 July 1989(3) on participation in tendering procedures organised by concessionaires;2. the setting up of such a commission would not constitute interference in company activities and therefore act as a deterrent, particularly to foreign investors wishing to take part in the privatisation, given that similar procedures are not used in the rest of the Community;3. the setting up of a stable core of shareholders is compatible with the provisions of the aforementioned Commission communication;4. it is true that, as reported by a leading daily newspaper, Società Autostrade made use of the services of a leading Roman law firm during the discussions with Brussels, and if so, which?Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission(25 November 1998)1. Article 3 of Council Directive 93/37/EEC of 14 June 1993 concerning the coordination of procedures for the award of public works contracts(4) distinguishes between different types of concessionaires in the case of works to be carried out by third parties. Paragraph 3 of the said Article stipulates that when the concessionaire is himself a contracting authority, he shall comply with the provisions of this Directive in the case of works to be carried out by third parties. Paragraph 4 of the Article, on the other hand, stipulates that a concessionaire other than a contracting authority is bound only to apply the advertising rules. There is no provision preventing any third party in relation to the concessionaire from conducting the procedures for the award of public works contracts.2. The Italian Authorities set up an external commission as part of their effort to make the rules for applying for the concession as transparent as possible and open to competition.3. The Commission, in order to reply more precisely to the third question, invites the Honourable Member to be more specific in his question about the stable core of shareholders.4. The Commission reminds the Honourable Member that institutionally it has relations exclusively with the Member States' authorities. It is for these national authorities to establish what means and resources should be employed and to determine the composition of the delegations that deal with the Commission.(1) OJ C 220, 19.7.1997.(2) OJ L 185, 16.8.1971, p. 5.(3) OJ L 210, 21.7.1989, p. 1.(4) OJ L 199, 9.8.1993.